Original Tesla Founder Is Sad That Musk Made a ‘Truck That Looks Like a Dumpster’ | Shots fired from the real co-founder.

It's actually the other way around. Since it doesn't drive most of the time, it's a dumpster that resembles a truck,

Its stainless special steel so itll always be the better looking dumpster

This is the least of his many humiliations.

How does it resemble a truck?

You can't see children or dogs in front.

Musk shoulda gone after the #vanlife luxury RV segment with a lighter 120kWh aluminum panel van. I put my day 1 preorder in to upfit the ct into a camp truck, but as the years went by it became clear it wasn't going to be all that suitable (e.g. that goddamn steering yoke / steer by wire). Really amazing to know that IQ 200 boy has basically killed his company but nobody understands this yet. Sure, cybertaxi can turn it around and justify the $1T market cap with a ~10X net revenue bump, but the whole effort can also always be that last .9 away from being safe enough, or, if doable, not come with much of a moat – since nobody owns the streets... Basically TSLA has to thread the needle of ADAS 4 being not too easy and not too hard LOL

Cybertaxi has no moat to get to a 1T valuation. They're just practicing layups on an 8 foot hoop while the pros are really playing.

You have to admit it does bear a passing resemblance to [Geoff](https://topgear.fandom.com/wiki/Geoff)

I am offended on Geoff's behalf.

[deleted]

>Sure, cybertaxi can turn it around and justify the $1T market cap with a \~10X net revenue bump, but the whole effort can also always be that last .9 away from being safe enough, or, if doable, not come with much of a moat – since nobody owns the streets... Tesla refuses to release any useful data or even milestones, trajectories, goals, anything for autonomous driving safety. It's just been year after year of "it's almost ready" with no qualifications to show for it. The closest thing we have to real world data shows they're not even close and aren't improving at nearly the rate necessary to be good enough any time soon. Ironically under Tesla's traditional approach (self driving under owner supervision) improving from 99% to 99.9% accuracy would likely make the vehicle *less* safe. It's going to be very difficult for an untrained supervisor to be ready to intervene after several months of not needing to. The market has been rewarding Tesla for their pivot to launching a supervised robotaxi service and planned production of cars that can't be manually driven at all. In my opinion that's a huge miscalculation and these moves should instead be giant red flags because they show a renewed lack of interest in actually demonstrating a path to maturity for FSD.

Even there I doubt they'd have any competitive advantage vs all the existing robotics and sex doll companies.

yeah the Austin service rollout was a stinker for me, clearly deadline-driven in time to provide something for Elon to ramble about on last week's EC. What's really setting off my BS detectors is all the past talk of the FSD fleet collecting all that data for FSD, yet Austin is running a special build better than the fleet somehow. That really doesn't make any sense, other than with a fleet of 20 they can be more aggressive in pushing out updated trained NNs to fix issues they're finding. But they didn't need to announce this, this is what they should have been doing for the past 10 years anyway.

Everything is a new slight of hand trick

I think it's pretty clear now that scaling training data alone doesn't guarantee that this will work. FSD is fundamentally constrained by the limits of its sensors and the compute rate of the inference hardware. Over training can result in under-fitting resulting in diminishing returns or even outright performance degradation. That said we have little idea what's really even different let alone superior about the robotaxi models. The only thing we know is that they (allegedly) incorporate microphone inputs for better emergency vehicle response. Despite reporting only 7000 miles over the fleet's first month or so of operation (a good order of magnitude less than I estimated) there have been several reported critical disengagements, including one needed to stop the car from running a railroad crossing. And those are just the ones that we know about because the Tesla friendly invited audience revealed them. Not a good track record at all.

Geoff had spirit though.

The A pillar blind spots should be illegal. It's so bad.

I have an S5, and the A pillar is awful as well. I regularly can't see people, and a few weeks ago I missed a bicycle. This was not an issue in any of my older cars. The cars built these days in general are just way too big.

It does look uncannily like a dumpster from behind at night.

I still can't believe with all the options available on the market someone would choose a CT and throw good money at it

Tires.

* sleight

Reminder: if a robotaxi needs a driver to babysit it then it’s just a taxi.

Calling Tarpenning and Eberhard the founders of Tesla is irony. They had no product, no money and didn't even own the Tesla trademark.

I'm guessing this Tesla founder is coming out of the closet lately is because he wants to be Tesla's next CEO.